Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
A discussion of metagame concepts in game design
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 7466080" data-attributes="member: 42582"><p>This has nothing to do with stance. <em>Stance </em>is an attempt to describe the relatoinship between <em>player establishment of fiction</em> and <em>player motivation</em> having regard to the player's special connection to the PC. It's not about talking in first or third person.</p><p></p><p>Whether you prefer first-person or third person narration by players to establish action declarations and shared fiction is a completely separate thing.</p><p></p><p>For instance, the following bit of narration (which also, in some systems, involves action declaration), is first person - but director stance:</p><p></p><p style="margin-left: 20px">Player (speaking in character): I hook up with the local dealers in contraband to get hold of some XYZ.</p><p></p><p>In Classic Traveller that's a prelude to a Streetwise check; in Burning Wheel to a Circles check; in a typical D&D game there is no associated action declaration, but a GM might still accept it - "Sure, you're pretty sure you'll find someone fiting that descrition at any divy tavern in the Thieves' Quarter."</p><p></p><p>Despite being first person, it's director stance because it establishes some element of the shared fiction - namely, local contraband dealers the PC might hook up with - without that fiction itself being produced by the actions/choices of the PC.</p><p></p><p>This has nothing to do with Stance either: a player saying those things is not trying to establish any shared fiction.</p><p></p><p>This doesn't make sense. I can't <em>literally </em>become a character. I can decide to <em>establish</em> or <em>author</em> a character. Until that is done, there is nothing for me to "become" or to "grasp".</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>This likewise all seems confused.</p><p></p><p>For instance, actual actors aren't being motivated by what motivates the character. They are being motivated by things like the desire to give a good performance, the desire to present the character authentically, the desire to please the director, the desire to get paid, etc, etc.</p><p></p><p>As far as inhabitation is concerned, the notion that some forms of narration at the table are more apt to produce "inhabitation" than others is an empirical conjecture, and I don't think there's any real evidence of it. (The opposite I've seen be true: ie when a player is in an especially inhabiting mood, s/he is more likely to narrate in first person - but the narration is the effect, not the cause, of the inhabitation.)</p><p></p><p>And the idea that author or director stance is treating the character as a pawn is not plausible at all. In the case of director stance, consider the example I just gave - that's not treating the PC as a pawn at all. I'm going to give more examples not far below that make the same point for author stance.</p><p></p><p>Huh? How does a player in (say) Moldvay Basic drfit to "director stance"? Or stay (vaguely or otherwise) in that stance?</p><p></p><p>And why would a player default to one stance, in games that invite players to inhabit multiple stances? There's no reason to think this is true at all. Eg in Burning Wheel, a player might quickly move from director stance (making a Circles check) to author stance (wondering whether to change a Belief) to actor stance (declaring an action for a PC having regard to established Beliefs - that's how the game works. In Classic Traveller a player might quickly move from actor stance (declaring an action for his/her PC because s/he is imaginging to what the PC would want, like say an Admin check to persuade an official to look the other way) to author stance (lending an item from his/her PC sheet to another player's PC, because that will help optimise the party for their mission) back to actor stance (griping that the borrowing PC is a bludger!).</p><p></p><p>There's a reason that every commentator who has written about player stances has concluded that they're highly fluid in play.</p><p></p><p>And these examples also shows us that there's no connection between author stance and treating the character as a pawn. Nor between stance and first/third person - all the stuff I just described could be narrated in first person.</p><p></p><p>This further illustrates the complete independence of Stance and "inhabitation" and "first person".</p><p></p><p>A player who "leans into" their role, deciding that <em>this</em> is the moment eg to reveal something profound about the character, is playing in author stance at that moment, but certainly need not cease to inhabit the character, nor drop out of first person narration.</p><p></p><p>Likewise a player who establishes (necessarily in director stance) that "I know a guy who can help", as per my example at the top of this post.</p><p></p><p>And for completeness, here's a repost of the definitions of stance:</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Much the same can be found at <a href="http://www.indie-rpgs.com/articles/4/" target="_blank">The Forge</a>, where (as far as I know) the notion was first systematically developed. As far as I can see the blog that has been linked to has mostly copy-pasted Edwards 2001 text.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 7466080, member: 42582"] This has nothing to do with stance. [I]Stance [/I]is an attempt to describe the relatoinship between [I]player establishment of fiction[/I] and [I]player motivation[/I] having regard to the player's special connection to the PC. It's not about talking in first or third person. Whether you prefer first-person or third person narration by players to establish action declarations and shared fiction is a completely separate thing. For instance, the following bit of narration (which also, in some systems, involves action declaration), is first person - but director stance: [indent]Player (speaking in character): I hook up with the local dealers in contraband to get hold of some XYZ.[/indent] In Classic Traveller that's a prelude to a Streetwise check; in Burning Wheel to a Circles check; in a typical D&D game there is no associated action declaration, but a GM might still accept it - "Sure, you're pretty sure you'll find someone fiting that descrition at any divy tavern in the Thieves' Quarter." Despite being first person, it's director stance because it establishes some element of the shared fiction - namely, local contraband dealers the PC might hook up with - without that fiction itself being produced by the actions/choices of the PC. This has nothing to do with Stance either: a player saying those things is not trying to establish any shared fiction. This doesn't make sense. I can't [I]literally [/I]become a character. I can decide to [I]establish[/I] or [I]author[/I] a character. Until that is done, there is nothing for me to "become" or to "grasp". This likewise all seems confused. For instance, actual actors aren't being motivated by what motivates the character. They are being motivated by things like the desire to give a good performance, the desire to present the character authentically, the desire to please the director, the desire to get paid, etc, etc. As far as inhabitation is concerned, the notion that some forms of narration at the table are more apt to produce "inhabitation" than others is an empirical conjecture, and I don't think there's any real evidence of it. (The opposite I've seen be true: ie when a player is in an especially inhabiting mood, s/he is more likely to narrate in first person - but the narration is the effect, not the cause, of the inhabitation.) And the idea that author or director stance is treating the character as a pawn is not plausible at all. In the case of director stance, consider the example I just gave - that's not treating the PC as a pawn at all. I'm going to give more examples not far below that make the same point for author stance. Huh? How does a player in (say) Moldvay Basic drfit to "director stance"? Or stay (vaguely or otherwise) in that stance? And why would a player default to one stance, in games that invite players to inhabit multiple stances? There's no reason to think this is true at all. Eg in Burning Wheel, a player might quickly move from director stance (making a Circles check) to author stance (wondering whether to change a Belief) to actor stance (declaring an action for a PC having regard to established Beliefs - that's how the game works. In Classic Traveller a player might quickly move from actor stance (declaring an action for his/her PC because s/he is imaginging to what the PC would want, like say an Admin check to persuade an official to look the other way) to author stance (lending an item from his/her PC sheet to another player's PC, because that will help optimise the party for their mission) back to actor stance (griping that the borrowing PC is a bludger!). There's a reason that every commentator who has written about player stances has concluded that they're highly fluid in play. And these examples also shows us that there's no connection between author stance and treating the character as a pawn. Nor between stance and first/third person - all the stuff I just described could be narrated in first person. This further illustrates the complete independence of Stance and "inhabitation" and "first person". A player who "leans into" their role, deciding that [I]this[/I] is the moment eg to reveal something profound about the character, is playing in author stance at that moment, but certainly need not cease to inhabit the character, nor drop out of first person narration. Likewise a player who establishes (necessarily in director stance) that "I know a guy who can help", as per my example at the top of this post. And for completeness, here's a repost of the definitions of stance: Much the same can be found at [url=www.indie-rpgs.com/articles/4/]The Forge[/url], where (as far as I know) the notion was first systematically developed. As far as I can see the blog that has been linked to has mostly copy-pasted Edwards 2001 text. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
A discussion of metagame concepts in game design
Top